RALEIGH, N.C. – Media outlets and citizens successful in public records lawsuits could soon have a better chance to get their attorney fees paid by the North Carolina government they sue.
 
The House tentatively approved legislation Thursday that would limit situations where a judge could deny legal fees when the city, county or state is in the wrong on withholding records.

An “Open Government Unit” within the Attorney General’s Office also would be formalized to help mediate conflicts.

The measure passed after a majority rejected an amendment that would have allowed a government to rely on the opinion of its own attorney to avoid paying the other side’s legal bills.

A final House vote could come Monday night. The bill has yet to be heard in the Senate.

RALEIGH, N.C. – A North Carolina House committee has cleared legislation that would allow people who are illegally denied requests for public documents to get their legal fees paid by the offending government agency.

The House judiciary committee on Thursday unanimously approved a bill that in most cases would eliminate the discretion of judges whether or not to award the legal fees. Government agencies could avoid payouts if they relied on an appeals court ruling or advice from the attorney general’s office that was later overturned.

Lobbyists for two local government associations said their trade groups opposed the measure. They said attorneys working for local governments also ought to be authoritative sources of legal opinions.

CHARLOTTE, N.C.  – North Carolina Rep. Nick Mackey said he supports a judge’s order that he turn over 11 years of his tax records to the State Bar because he wants to resolve the organization’s investigation.

A judge in Wake County ordered the state to turn over tax records for the Charlotte Democrat from 1997 to 2007.

“I requested them on my own, and when we didn’t get them (the Bar) filed that. You can only wait so long for people to give you something after you ask for it. And that’s what we did,” Mackey told The Charlotte Observer.

A State Bar spokeswoman would not talk about the request, saying any complaints against its members are confidential unless they result in disciplinary action.

Mackey said the complaint accuses him of not filing or paying taxes and surfaced after his the race for Mecklenburg County sheriff in 2007. Mackey won a disputed party election, but county commissioners eventually appointed his rival to the position.

Along with tax returns, the order issued Thursday also asks the state Revenue Department to turn over copies of any tax liens, tax payments or agreement to pay taxes owed.

Mackey filed for bankruptcy in 2005, the same year he had a federal lien filed against him that claimed he owed Internal Revenue Service $12,153 in taxes and penalties.

Winston-Salem Journal

For many North Carolinians seeking access to government documents, the state’s public-records law is meaningless. A bureaucrat or elected official can refuse to release a public document, and the citizen cannot afford the legal costs associated with suing for its release.

That obstruction of open government would change significantly if legislation before the N.C. House of Representatives becomes law. House Bill 1134 would make it almost certain that citizens who successfully sue for records would get reimbursed for a reasonable amount of attorneys’ fees. The bill would also establish an “open government unit” within the N.C. Department of Justice that would mediate disputes over both public records and open meetings long before the case ever goes before a judge.

North Carolina’s public-records law guarantees access to the vast amount of information that state and local governments control. The underlying philosophy is that open government promotes democracy. The government belongs to each of us. Our government creates records using our tax money. Therefore, the records belong to every citizen, and access to those records should be assured unless there is a legitimate, statutory reason for keeping the record from public view.

Many North Carolinians learn the hard way that public philosophy and government practice are often two very different things. Agencies regularly deny access to records that are, by law, public. The only recourse citizens – or in many cases, the press – have is a lawsuit.

Rep. Deborah Ross, D-Wake, one of the bill’s co-sponsors, recently told the Journal that the beauty of the new legislation is the possibility that it will keep most disputes out of court. The new unit in the Justice Department will not only help settle disputes between citizens and government agencies, it will also work to better educate government workers about the public-records and open-meetings laws. That effort, alone, could go a long way toward solving the problem.

It won’t solve it entirely, however. Mediation won’t solve every dispute, either. For those cases not resolved through mediation, citizens can go to court. If they win, they’ll get their attorney fees reimbursed. If they lose, they won’t.

As North Carolina law stands now, government agencies face no consequences for failing to provide access to public records. If this bill becomes law, bureaucrats and public officials will have something to explain to taxpayers. We hope that possibility will help change agency attitudes toward public-records requests.
.

RALEIGH, N.C.  – A government agency that illegally withheld public records or documents would have to award reasonable legal fees under a bill introduced in the state House.

North Carolina Press Association executive director Beth Grace said Tuesday the legislation can prevent people who fight city hall from going broke even if they win their case. Agencies that rely on legal advice to keep records closed wouldn’t have to pay.
 
Judges can now order government officials to pay legal bills, but are reluctant do so.
 
The measure introduced by Wake County Democrat Deborah Ross would create an Open Government Unit in the attorney general’s office that would mediate disputes before they went to court.

A similar plan passed the state Senate last summer but it died in the House.

RALEIGH, N.C. – A new survey by The Associated Press shows North Carolina among the best states at posting public records on the Internet.

But those records are sometimes hard to find.

The Sunshine Week 2009 Survey of State Government Information examined how all 50 states provide online access to 20 different kinds of records, ranging from consumer complaints to teacher certifications. North Carolina ranked third.

The survey found the Department of Transportation’s Web site lists status updates for every road project and the Attorney General’s Office allows users to file consumer complaints.

But there are inconsistencies in the type and depth of public records. The Department of Health and Human Services’ Web site doesn’t post comprehensive details about the safety inspections at places such as nursing homes.

House Speaker Joe Hackney says he wants to try again for a bill that would give legal fees to those who win in public records lawsuits, the N&O reports.

In a few years, taxpayers could be supporting George W. Bush’s library at Southern Methodist University in Texas without having any authority to access the presidential papers housed there.

President-elect Obama and the new U.S. Congress should quickly correct this injustice.

In 1978, in the aftermath of the Watergate scandal and the prolonged legal fights over presidential records and executive privilege, Congress passed the Presidential Records Act. It was intended to give the American public access to most presidential papers well after the end of the chief executive’s terms.

The act was not a radical document. It compromised the public’s desire to see these records with real-world necessities. Most of the records are not available for 12 years after a president leaves office, and others can be blocked indefinitely for purposes such as national security and personnel privacy.

Unfortunately for the public, however, just about every president since Jimmy Carter has tried to undermine the law. George W. Bush, with an executive order issued on Nov. 1, 2001, less than a year into his presidency, essentially repealed the law.

Bush’s order gives almost absolute power to a former president or vice president, or that person’s family and descendants, to block the release of these papers. It also increases the number of exemptions to the Freedom of Information Act, thus weakening public access, and it shifts the advantage in public-records litigation from the public advantage to those blocking release.

It is important to understand that this order did not improve national security in the days after the terrorist attacks. National security was already protected in the acts. This order simply protects Bush and other former presidents from the political inconvenience of having their records – which are public property – examined by scholars and the public.

Several attempts to override Bush’s order have failed in Congress. Lawsuits have also failed on technical issues, albeit important legalities but not issues related to the public’s right to know.

While in the Senate, Obama co-sponsored a bill that would have overridden the Bush order. And a Web site tied to his campaign endorsed efforts to correct this situation. But promises from candidates often go unfulfilled, especially when higher-profile concerns face the public. Furthermore, as a future former president, Obama will have a personal stake in siding with Bush on this issue.

Obama must side with the public. These are public records and in time they should be available to the public and to scholars. Obama should countermand Bush’s order and Congress should formulate a new, strong law to protect access to these important historical records.

COLUMBUS, Ohio  – Democratic vice presidential nominee Joe Biden and his wife on Friday released a decade of their personal financial records, showing a veteran U.S. senator who earned less than many of his congressional colleagues.

The Bidens’ move is designed to pressure Republican vice presidential pick Sarah Palin to release her financial records. An aide to GOP presidential nominee John McCain said the campaign would release the documents but gave no indication when that would happen.

Joe and Jill Biden earned $319,853 in 2007. Joe Biden reported $161,708 in income from the U.S. Senate and another $71,000 in royalties for his book, “Promises to Keep.”

Jill Biden earned $66,546 at her job at Delaware Technical and Community College, where she teaches English.

The couple paid $42,516 in federal taxes and another $10,912 in Delaware state taxes in 2007.

The Bidens also paid household employee taxes of $772. A campaign spokesman said that was for a housekeeper who visits the family’s Wilmington, Del., home and does not live there.

The tax return shows that the Bidens paid the alternative minimum tax that the senator has argued should be changed “so millions of middle-income Americans are not hurt by a tax intended to make sure the wealthiest pay their share.” Biden and his wife claimed an income of $280,146 last year under that provision, and paid $66,273 in income taxes.

The alternative minimum tax was established in 1969 in essence to limit the deductions that the richest Americans could take, ensuring that they would pay at least some tax. But because it was never adjusted for inflation, more and more taxpayers are getting swept in.

In the 2006 tax year, a few taxpayers with incomes as low as $40,000 were affected by the alternative minimum tax, according to figures kept by the congressional Joint Committee on Taxation. About 10 percent in the $100,000 to $200,000 income bracket fell under it, and 74 percent in the $200,000 to $500,000 income range had to pay it that year.

Biden, who underwent brain surgery for a life-threatening aneurysm in 1988, has yet to release his medical records.
 
Biden already had released a summary of his personal finances per U.S. Senate rules. In June of this year, he reported assets between $59,000 and $366,000; Senate rules allow for broad reporting windows.

Unlike Republican John McCain, the Bidens file their taxes jointly. McCain’s tax returns showed a total income of $405,409 in 2007.

According to her 2006 tax returns, Cindy McCain had a total income of $6 million. Her wealth is estimated by some at $100 million, based on her late father’s Arizona beer distributorship. She has not released her 2007 returns, which she files separately from her husband.
 
Obama and his wife, Michelle, reported making $4.2 million in 2007.